Neo-Papal Patriarchalism

[Aristokles]

I tend to see the EP's role as not " neo-papal patriarchalism", although I can see how that idea appears to be the case. I view that the EP's role in defining "full communion" status to be passive and symbolic and not as a kind of active requirement. It's merely a statement signifying the brotherly apostolic relations.
I , "world Orthodox" that I am, have never viewed our Church structure as a pyramid with an Orthodox "Pope" as it's head, but a communion of equal churches with the EP holding the place of a hub or nexus - a symbol of unity.
Hence, Al G. Green's statement, quoted from a parish website in Ohio (I think) is just that a statement of fact, not of a requirement fulfilled.

Demetri

[Justin Kissel]

I believe you are correct, and that I was mistaken I was thinking of the lack of acknowledgement of their autocephaly, and mistakenly wrote thinking that they weren't in "full communion". I guess you can be in "full communion" even if you don't recognize someone's autocephaly...

I do think that the most popular form of neo-papal-patriarchalism is the setting up of supposedly "canonical" jurisdictions as the criterion for whether one is Orthodox. I do take back my remark about Al Green's inconsistency, and I do feel embarrassed to have made such a stupid mistake as I did! I really need to stop rushing posts.

Regardless, I think the statement is misleading on the site. Even if I botched the Al Green thing, the "definition" remains unOrthodox if only because not every Orthodox Church is in communion with the EP. The reader of that page is left believing that ROCOR (not to mention other groups) must be unOrthodox since they aren't in communion with the EP.

Again, I apologize for the mistake--and I thank those who corrected me, so that I don't repeat the mistake again (to my own condemnation).